Jared Flores
Annotation 2: The People Paradox
1.Title, director, and release year?
The People Paradox, directed by Sarah Holt, released in 2004
2.What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central argument of the film is that the population of the world is growing too rapidly. The film mainly addresses the issue of limited resources, and how if the population continues to grow at the current rate, Earth’s population will be over 9 billion and there won’t be enough resources left to sustain the population. The film also discusses how some countries, like India, have high fertility rates and are in danger of explosive population growth. Still, some countries are at the other end of the spectrum, like Japan. Such countries have dangerously low fertility rates, and as such have a declining population. Low fertility rate countries are said to have a generally “old” population, while countries with high fertility rates are said to have a generally “young” population. The film goes on to argue what must be done in order to put a stop to the extreme population growth that our planet is on its way to having.
3.What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
The most prominent sustainability problem drawn out by the film is behavioral sustainability. Mainly, the problem of population growth is shown to be a result of high amounts of sexual activity in countries such as Africa. Prostitutes in Africa are in high demand, and men pay more to have sex without a condom. While this does lead to the spread of AIDS, which could in theory control the population due to the high death rates that would result from it, this mostly leads to a large number of pregnant prostitutes.
Another sustainability issue that is addressed is cultural sustainability problems. In Africa for example, only 19% of women use birth control pills, and it is illegal to get abortions. This, added to the low use rate of condoms, contributes to the countries fertility rate of six children per woman. Also, in India, it is culturally more beneficial for families to have male children, as female children require their families to pay dowries to the families of their husbands upon marriage. That said, families would “keep trying” until they get a male baby. This cultural stigma has led to several domestic disputes, as the men naturally blame the women for not bearing them sons even though we all know it’s the man’s fault.
Briefly mentioned in the film is ecological sustainability. Because of the high population growth the world over, resources such as food and water are naturally running out. Farmland is being stripped bare of nutrients just to grow enough food to sustain the population. Also, high population leads to over-consumption of natural resources such as fossil fuels.
4.What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
One part of the film I found compelling was the part where it showed a single child in an elementary grade class in Japan. I had always known that the world was in danger of explosive population growth, but I had no idea that population was in decline in some countries as well. That scene really illustrated just how few children were born each year in Japan.
Another persuasive part of the movie was the use of population pyramids for each country that the movie discussed. It was very interesting to see that Japan had more old people than young people due to population decline, and that India had much more young people than old people due to high fertility rates. However, what surprised me was the shape of the pyramid for Africa, which had a low number of old people but also few infants, due to the high birth rate coupled with the high death rate.
5.What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
Personally, I thought that the part of the film depicting the independence of women in Japan was not compelling. While it is a good thing for women to seek careers and to want to be more than housewives, I felt that this was not a good reason for women to not want to have kids. There are plenty of married couples wherein the woman is the one who has a successful career and the man is the one who stays at home and watches the kids. It just seemed like there should have been more to the situation in Japan than women wanting to have successful careers. It seems doubtful that that’s the main reason why there is a low fertility rate in Japan.
6.What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
This film has inspired me to research the population pyramids of various other countries. The film itself covered the United States, Africa, India, and Japan. The coverage of these countries’ population problems makes one curious to see how the rest of the world is doing. I would also like to research how the government is addressing these problems. The film explains that in Africa, the government has adopted family planning, and that in Japan, the government blames the people and families for the state of the population. Sooner or later the government must attend to matters concerning the population, and I am curious to see how they do that in the future.
7.What audience does this film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
Honestly, I believe that this film best addresses sexually active teenagers and young adults. The film talks a lot about what kind of terrible things can happen to the world if population growth isn’t controlled. Sexually active young people who see this film might think twice about having sex too often, or about not using a condom or other forms of birth control. The segment on Africa may well scare people into not having sex with various partners, and the Japan segment may inspire women to be more independent and career oriented.
8.What kinds of actions or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This film mentions on multiple occasions that in order to control population growth, the average fertility rate of the world must be about 2 kids per couple. The only clear point of action that the film suggests seems to be to petition the government to put restrictions on the number of children a family can have. This seems to work in China, although the cultural stigma causes a lot of male children to be kept while female babies are abandoned or aborted. Another possible point of action suggested is to spread birth control awareness and to encourage people to have less sex.
9.What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental education value?
I feel like this film focused a lot on describing the problem and not enough on the impact this problem was having on the Earth. Sure, repopulation is too high in places and too low in others, but what effect is this having on our remaining resources? This film could have used some more vignettes on how these population problems are affecting people. That way, the problem would have been more illustrated and relatable to the audience.
Annotation 2: The People Paradox
1. Title, director, and release year?
The People Paradox, directed by Sarah Holt, released in 2004
2. What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The central argument of the film is that the population of the world is growing too rapidly. The film mainly addresses the issue of limited resources, and how if the population continues to grow at the current rate, Earth’s population will be over 9 billion and there won’t be enough resources left to sustain the population. The film also discusses how some countries, like India, have high fertility rates and are in danger of explosive population growth. Still, some countries are at the other end of the spectrum, like Japan. Such countries have dangerously low fertility rates, and as such have a declining population. Low fertility rate countries are said to have a generally “old” population, while countries with high fertility rates are said to have a generally “young” population. The film goes on to argue what must be done in order to put a stop to the extreme population growth that our planet is on its way to having.
3. What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
The most prominent sustainability problem drawn out by the film is behavioral sustainability. Mainly, the problem of population growth is shown to be a result of high amounts of sexual activity in countries such as Africa. Prostitutes in Africa are in high demand, and men pay more to have sex without a condom. While this does lead to the spread of AIDS, which could in theory control the population due to the high death rates that would result from it, this mostly leads to a large number of pregnant prostitutes.
Another sustainability issue that is addressed is cultural sustainability problems. In Africa for example, only 19% of women use birth control pills, and it is illegal to get abortions. This, added to the low use rate of condoms, contributes to the countries fertility rate of six children per woman. Also, in India, it is culturally more beneficial for families to have male children, as female children require their families to pay dowries to the families of their husbands upon marriage. That said, families would “keep trying” until they get a male baby. This cultural stigma has led to several domestic disputes, as the men naturally blame the women for not bearing them sons even though we all know it’s the man’s fault.
Briefly mentioned in the film is ecological sustainability. Because of the high population growth the world over, resources such as food and water are naturally running out. Farmland is being stripped bare of nutrients just to grow enough food to sustain the population. Also, high population leads to over-consumption of natural resources such as fossil fuels.
4. What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
One part of the film I found compelling was the part where it showed a single child in an elementary grade class in Japan. I had always known that the world was in danger of explosive population growth, but I had no idea that population was in decline in some countries as well. That scene really illustrated just how few children were born each year in Japan.
Another persuasive part of the movie was the use of population pyramids for each country that the movie discussed. It was very interesting to see that Japan had more old people than young people due to population decline, and that India had much more young people than old people due to high fertility rates. However, what surprised me was the shape of the pyramid for Africa, which had a low number of old people but also few infants, due to the high birth rate coupled with the high death rate.
5. What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by?
Personally, I thought that the part of the film depicting the independence of women in Japan was not compelling. While it is a good thing for women to seek careers and to want to be more than housewives, I felt that this was not a good reason for women to not want to have kids. There are plenty of married couples wherein the woman is the one who has a successful career and the man is the one who stays at home and watches the kids. It just seemed like there should have been more to the situation in Japan than women wanting to have successful careers. It seems doubtful that that’s the main reason why there is a low fertility rate in Japan.
6. What additional information does this film compel you to seek out? Where do you want to dig deeper and what connections do you want to make with other issues, factors, problems, etc.?
This film has inspired me to research the population pyramids of various other countries. The film itself covered the United States, Africa, India, and Japan. The coverage of these countries’ population problems makes one curious to see how the rest of the world is doing. I would also like to research how the government is addressing these problems. The film explains that in Africa, the government has adopted family planning, and that in Japan, the government blames the people and families for the state of the population. Sooner or later the government must attend to matters concerning the population, and I am curious to see how they do that in the future.
7. What audience does this film best address? What kind of imagination is fostered in viewers? Do you think the film is likely to change the way viewers think about and act on environmental problems?
Honestly, I believe that this film best addresses sexually active teenagers and young adults. The film talks a lot about what kind of terrible things can happen to the world if population growth isn’t controlled. Sexually active young people who see this film might think twice about having sex too often, or about not using a condom or other forms of birth control. The segment on Africa may well scare people into not having sex with various partners, and the Japan segment may inspire women to be more independent and career oriented.
8. What kinds of actions or points of intervention are suggested by the film?
This film mentions on multiple occasions that in order to control population growth, the average fertility rate of the world must be about 2 kids per couple. The only clear point of action that the film suggests seems to be to petition the government to put restrictions on the number of children a family can have. This seems to work in China, although the cultural stigma causes a lot of male children to be kept while female babies are abandoned or aborted. Another possible point of action suggested is to spread birth control awareness and to encourage people to have less sex.
9. What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental education value?
I feel like this film focused a lot on describing the problem and not enough on the impact this problem was having on the Earth. Sure, repopulation is too high in places and too low in others, but what effect is this having on our remaining resources? This film could have used some more vignettes on how these population problems are affecting people. That way, the problem would have been more illustrated and relatable to the audience.